Why Tim Nelson is Dangerous to IAM-represented employees at United Airlines

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kev3188 said:
If Fear of Loss is the only arrow you have in the quiver, then you guys suck even worse than I thought.



Pot meet kettle...
Click to expand...

Gee Kevin, your the one slinging that arrow. There is no contract that protects locations before TA. Perhaps you can show us one. The current article 2 only protects big jets for the UA ramp no protection for CS, res, storekeepers . The pilots allowed bigger RJs so tell us how long do you think before the company can interchange those aircraft into the system April 2014?
 
Socplat13 said:
It is very clear Tim Nelson has very little understanding regarding collective bargaining and the interests of IAM-represented employees at United Airlines.

This thread will--point by point--dismantle Nelson's positions as they relate to IAM-represented employees present condition in negotiations with United Airlines:

(1) Nelson claims that IAM District 141 is conceding "scope" protections for IAM-represented employees at United Airlines.

The truth is, IAM-represented employees at United Airlines currently possess very little scope protection. Only pre-merger United ramp employees possess scope of any kind. In fact, there are presently a little over 3,000 pre-merger UA ramp employees out of a total of 6,100 that have scope protection.

While there are 29 named stations, two have closed MKE and FLL, in which only IAM-represented ramp service employees can perform MAINLINE United flights, these stations have become over the last decade largely or partially United Express stations in which the work can be contracted out.

All other pre-merger Continental--Fleet and ASA, and pre-merger United customer service work have absolutely no scope protections.

Nelson--a US Airways ramp service employee, advocates that thousands of IAM-represented employees at United without absolutely no protection vote against protecting their jobs because he would like to see the IAM fail at United so he can personally benefit politically.

I challenge Nelson to debate me regarding any and all issues relating to job security at United Airlines. I doubt he will because he never stands up to a challenge of wits. He'd rather spend his time in the sphere of the nitwit.
Click to expand...

Now it's making $cents.
 
Nelson has to say no, no matter what because he cannot ever agree with Delaney. To do so would end his political ambitions.
 
737823 said:
How many do UA/UAX fly to that don't have M/L ramp? AA/AE? US/US Express? As 700 says no airline has mainline ramp at every city. The NY Times article I posted states in 1998 UA had 113 m/l stations and 17 reservations centers. Not only that but the IAM also had significantly more dues paying members and was on much stronger foundation too. Times have changed...

Josh
Click to expand...

That is what has happened at UA. We need to grab that work in this contract or watch skywest just take the world one location at a time.
 
jet job said:
That is what has happened at UA. We need to grab that work in this contract or watch skywest just take the world one location at a time.
Click to expand...

Funny you say that now, why were you cheering in an agreement that only protected seven stations? Why not introduce language protecting E70/E75 flights like CWA at US has? It's clear that is the direction UA is heading. The potential for UA to use those aircraft from ORD/DEN is huge, and even some markets from EWR/SFO could be replaced too. UA could essentially shrink m/l flying to anything over 900nm per the pilot CBA leaving international, transcontinental, and only some longer range domestic flying.

The simple fact here is that other workgroups directly benefit from strong pilot scope clauses. Obviously a majority of the pilots believed the other improvements in the JCBA outweighs the scope concessions so it's time for ramp/PCE to push hard for their own protection.

Josh
 
Now you got it. That is exactly what the TA did with its multi layer protections. 1999 2006 and core work and captured UAX.
 
Socplat13 said:
It is very clear Tim Nelson has very little understanding regarding collective bargaining and the interests of IAM-represented employees at United Airlines.

This thread will--point by point--dismantle Nelson's positions as they relate to IAM-represented employees present condition in negotiations with United Airlines:

(1) Nelson claims that IAM District 141 is conceding "scope" protections for IAM-represented employees at United Airlines.

The truth is, IAM-represented employees at United Airlines currently possess very little scope protection. Only pre-merger United ramp employees possess scope of any kind. In fact, there are presently a little over 3,000 pre-merger UA ramp employees out of a total of 6,100 that have scope protection.

While there are 29 named stations, two have closed MKE and FLL, in which only IAM-represented ramp service employees can perform MAINLINE United flights, these stations have become over the last decade largely or partially United Express stations in which the work can be contracted out.

All other pre-merger Continental--Fleet and ASA, and pre-merger United customer service work have absolutely no scope protections.

Nelson--a US Airways ramp service employee, advocates that thousands of IAM-represented employees at United without absolutely no protection vote against protecting their jobs because he would like to see the IAM fail at United so he can personally benefit politically.

I challenge Nelson to debate me regarding any and all issues relating to job security at United Airlines. I doubt he will because he never stands up to a challenge of wits. He'd rather spend his time in the sphere of the nitwit.
Click to expand...

A lot of good points in this post that shouldn't be lost as this thread gets longer.
 
jet job said:
Now you got it. That is exactly what the TA did with its multi layer protections. 1999 2006 and core work and captured UAX.
Click to expand...

How? Please elaborate with those dates? I still say there is something funny about that. 10% of the members sacrificed is not the way to go. You still haven't answered my question about the situation at IAD between 141 and 142 (Air Wisconsin). Obviously the company is bringing in new 175's to replace most of the 50 seat aircraft. Who gets that work in IAD? And also will Air Wisconsin be the express handler of choice in the hubs, (knowing Delaney and crew would write another secret LOA) keeping the dues flow going. What's to say even with this agreement.

Still a lot of questions...........
 
T5towbar said:
Obviously the company is bringing in new 175's to replace most of the 50 seat aircraft.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right, but my fear is these will begin to backfill retirements of m/l AC. sUA 757s are being retired as we speak and yes 739ER replacements are coming online, but nothing stoping UA from backfilling more of that flying with existing737NG fleet and Airbus from sUA and gradually redistribute capacity throughout the network. sCO 735s are gone, sUA 733 and 735 fleet retired Oct 2009 was entirely backfilled by RJs and many stations like MHT, MIA, STL and others were outsourced as a result. Besides, as it is the sUA Airbuses are approaching 15 years as are some of the early build 738s and 73Gs, which could be candidates to be replaced by current and future RJ deals. Didn't Gojet enter in an agreement to pickup Mitsubishi RJs operated for UA?

Josh
 
737823 said:
I hope you are right, but my fear is these will begin to backfill retirements of m/l AC. sUA 757s are being retired as we speak and yes 739ER replacements are coming online, but nothing stoping UA from backfilling more of that flying with existing737NG fleet and Airbus from sUA and gradually redistribute capacity throughout the network. sCO 735s are gone, sUA 733 and 735 fleet retired Oct 2009 was entirely backfilled by RJs and many stations like MHT, MIA, STL and others were outsourced as a result. Besides, as it is the sUA Airbuses are approaching 15 years as are some of the early build 738s and 73Gs, which could be candidates to be replaced by current and future RJ deals. Didn't Gojet enter in an agreement to pickup Mitsubishi RJs operated for UA?

Josh
Click to expand...

No. GoJet would probably be the other candidate for the 175 as well. UA is purchasing 35 175's for Mesa to fly. And UA is getting IIRC 35 to 40 more for another vendor to fly. That probably would be GoJet (the usual lower bidder) So a total of 75 or so 175's would be on property by mid - late 2014 - 2015. SkyWest is supposed to be looking into the the 175 as well, and will be buying them on their own. They are the biggest regional out there. And according to the new pilot deal, the RJ fleet is supposed to be reduced to a certain number. That way, ML won't make the mistake of when UA went into BK to give up a lot of M/L flying. But they gave up the very restrictive scope that sCO pilots had, hence the reason why the 50 seaters will be leaving.
And I think that the new Bombardier C Series would be over 100 seats (which mainline would have to fly) Similiar to the E190 but a bit bigger according to specs. IIRC, no one is looking into the MRJ yet.

Either way, there will be more 175's coming to replace the CRJ's and the 145's that SkyWest (and ASA- ExpressJet) has. All of sCO's 737 fleet will be flying for a very long time, and the Airbus fleet has been in refurbishment as well. Plus UA has ordered the 737 MAX as well, so there will be plenty of mainline flying. WE just have to get and protect that 175 work.
 
The TA was the first contract to cover RJ flying by vendors and secure work for IAM members in locations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

DB Cooper
Mechanics ratify agreement
Replies
1
Views
1K
ualflynhi
U
W
Iam 141 update 12-27-02
2
Replies
20
Views
4K
ual747mech
U
W
IAM Vote Cancelled
Replies
0
Views
2K
wts54
W
Giant Robot!
  • Locked
IAM-TWU Election (Tim Nelson)
Replies
13
Views
8K
robbedagain
robbedagain
U
IAM Voices Support for UA LCC
Replies
11
Views
2K
whatkindoffreshhell
whatkindoffreshhell

Latest posts

Back
Top